By reading this comment, you agree to pay me $500 billion dollars (or, alternatively, pay on an installment plan with reasonable interest) with no chance for arbitration. And if you do take me to court and I loose, you agree to pay me anyway.

I was actually thinking about this recently from another angle. What if someone got a tattoo of someone else's intellectual property (say, Mickey Mouse)? Would the owner of that IP have any legal grounds to say that the tattooed individual can't allow that tattoo to be displayed in certain situations? What if the tattooee was getting paid to, say, show off their tattoos? Would Disney in this case have any claim on that money?

I'm certainly no legal expert, so there may be clear and obvious answers to my questions. Just something I was thinking about.

And why does Sony (who really should know better) think that this strategy will be effective this time, when every single time a company has reacted this way it has backfired in a big, bad way?

Because that's how Sony is. They have demonstrated continually throughout their recent history that they are a poorly managed company. They're pretty good at making stuff, but outside of that, they don't know what they're doing.

Not to mention, anyone performing that specific search probably already knows about the movie. Otherwise, why would they randomly Google that.

And if they Googled it because they randomly heard her name coupled with "pedophile" somewhere and wanted to learn more about it, she would only be absolved, as the person searching for the terms would learn, "Oh, that's just from a movie."